PURPOSE: To report the application of an adaptive replanning technique for prostate cancer radiotherapy (RT), consisting of two steps: (1) segment aperture morphing (SAM), and (2) segment weight optimization (SWO), to account for interfraction variations. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The new "SAM+SWO" scheme was retroactively applied to the daily CT images acquired for 10 prostate cancer patients on a linear accelerator and CT-on-Rails combination during the course of RT. Doses generated by the SAM+SWO scheme based on the daily CT images were compared with doses generated after patient repositioning using the current planning target volume (PTV) margin (5 mm, 3 mm toward rectum) and a reduced margin (2 mm), along with full reoptimization scans based on the daily CT images to evaluate dosimetry benefits. RESULTS: For all cases studied, the online replanning method provided significantly better target coverage when compared with repositioning with reduced PTV (13% increase in minimum prostate dose) and improved organ sparing when compared with repositioning with regular PTV (13% decrease in the generalized equivalent uniform dose of rectum). The time required to complete the online replanning process was 6 +/- 2 minutes. CONCLUSION: The proposed online replanning method can be used to account for interfraction variations for prostate RT with a practically acceptable time frame (5-10 min) and with significant dosimetric benefits. On the basis of this study, the developed online replanning scheme is being implemented in the clinic for prostate RT. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PURPOSE: To report the application of an adaptive replanning technique for prostate cancer radiotherapy (RT), consisting of two steps: (1) segment aperture morphing (SAM), and (2) segment weight optimization (SWO), to account for interfraction variations. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The new "SAM+SWO" scheme was retroactively applied to the daily CT images acquired for 10 prostate cancerpatients on a linear accelerator and CT-on-Rails combination during the course of RT. Doses generated by the SAM+SWO scheme based on the daily CT images were compared with doses generated after patient repositioning using the current planning target volume (PTV) margin (5 mm, 3 mm toward rectum) and a reduced margin (2 mm), along with full reoptimization scans based on the daily CT images to evaluate dosimetry benefits. RESULTS: For all cases studied, the online replanning method provided significantly better target coverage when compared with repositioning with reduced PTV (13% increase in minimum prostate dose) and improved organ sparing when compared with repositioning with regular PTV (13% decrease in the generalized equivalent uniform dose of rectum). The time required to complete the online replanning process was 6 +/- 2 minutes. CONCLUSION: The proposed online replanning method can be used to account for interfraction variations for prostate RT with a practically acceptable time frame (5-10 min) and with significant dosimetric benefits. On the basis of this study, the developed online replanning scheme is being implemented in the clinic for prostate RT. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: William A Hall; Eric Paulson; X Allen Li; Beth Erickson; Christopher Schultz; Alison Tree; Musaddiq Awan; Daniel A Low; Brigid A McDonald; Travis Salzillo; Carri K Glide-Hurst; Amar U Kishan; Clifton D Fuller Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2021-11-18 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Sebastian Hild; Christian Graeff; Antoni Rucinski; Klemens Zink; Gregor Habl; Marco Durante; Klaus Herfarth; Christoph Bert Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2015-11-27 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Hoon Sik Choi; Guang Sub Jo; Jong Pyo Chae; Sang Bong Lee; Chul Hang Kim; Bae Kwon Jeong; Hojin Jeong; Yun Hee Lee; In Bong Ha; Ki Mun Kang; Jin Ho Song Journal: Comput Math Methods Med Date: 2017-12-18 Impact factor: 2.238
Authors: Carri K Glide-Hurst; Percy Lee; Adam D Yock; Jeffrey R Olsen; Minsong Cao; Farzan Siddiqui; William Parker; Anthony Doemer; Yi Rong; Amar U Kishan; Stanley H Benedict; X Allen Li; Beth A Erickson; Jason W Sohn; Ying Xiao; Evan Wuthrick Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2020-10-24 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Richard Oates; Suki Gill; Farshad Foroudi; Michael Lim Joon; Michal Schneider; Mathias Bressel; Tomas Kron Journal: J Med Phys Date: 2015 Jan-Mar